- (1.) None is present for the respondents. On the last date of hearing also, respondents were absent. This writ petition has been accordingly heard on merits in the absence of the respondents.
(2.) The petitioner was selected as Assistant Grade-II with the respondent No. I-Food Corporation of India on 6.7.1970. She came to be promoted as Assistant Grade-II (Ministerial) in the year 1972. The petitioner was further promoted as Assistant Grade-I on 22.9.1976. Copy of the order dated 22.9.1976 is annexed with the writ petition as Annexure P-1. This order indicates that she was brought on promotion panel for appointment on substantive basis. The procedure for promotion is indicated in Regulation 10 of the Food Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1971 Regulations"). The promotion is to be made on the basis of seniority subject to fitness in respect of non-selection. From the order (Annexure P-1), it also appears that a panel was drawn and the petitioner's name figured at Sr. No. 9 of promotion panel. The promotees were also directed to report for duty to the officers concerned. There was also stipulation in paragraph 2 of the order that the promotion of the official is subject to vigilance clearance by the concerned controlling office. In the aforesaid order, the petitioner was sought to be posted in Punjab Region. However, a corrigendum came to be issued on 26.8.1978 (Annexure P-2) whereby the petitioner's posting on promotional post was changed from Punjab Region to H.P. Region and his date of joining was extended upto 11.9.1978. This Corrigendum was followed by a formal promotion order issued on 12.9.1978 (Annexure P-3) whereby besides ordering promotion of the petitioner as Assistant Grade-I (M) on regular substantive basis, she was asked to report for duty to the Officer on Special Duty, H.P. Region, Shimla for deployment as AG-I. Her promotion was to take effect from the date she attends duty. It is also evident from this order that the petitioner was required to join latest by 19.9.1978. The petitioner has stated in the writ petition that she was entitled to be promoted in Punjab Region and not H.P. She made a representation for her adjustment in Punjab Region, but was kept waiting and never permitted to join in Punjab Region. It appears that the petitioner did not join in H.P. region and continued to be posted as AG-II in the Punjab Region. Eventually, she was posted as AG-I in Punjab w.e.f. 11.8.1980. It is admitted case of the parties that since 11.8.1980, the petitioner continued to perform the duty as AG-I. Seniority list of AG-I (Ministerial) (Annexure P-4) was circulated by the respondent-Corporation on 23.8.1979, as stood on 21.12.1978. In this seniority list, the petitioner was placed at Sr. No. 504 above Gian Chand. In this seniority list, petitioner's date of promotion is shown as 18.11.1976. She is not aggrieved of her seniority position as indicated in the seniority list (Annexure P-4). The aforesaid seniority list (Annexure P-4) was followed by another seniority list dated 31.8.1982 (Annexure P-5) wherein her name was shown at Sr. No. 491 above Gian Chand who was shown at Sr. No. 492. The petitioner is also satisfied with this seniority list. On 1.11.1985, another provisional seniority list (Annexure P-6) came to be circulated with seniority as stood on 31.10.1985. In this seniority list (Annexure P-6), the petitioner was shown at Sr. No. 563. The petitioner is aggrieved of her seniority position as reflected in this seniority list (Annexure P-6). She claimed that she should have been at Sr. No. 427-A a above Gian Chand. Aggrieved of the seniority position, she filed CWP No. 1604 of 1987 which came to be disposed of vide order dated 14.1.1988, with the following orders :- "The main grievance of the petitioner is that her name has been brought down by 123 places in the list circulated on 1.11.1985. Mr. G.C. Garg, learned counsel for the respondents has contended that this seniority list is only provisional. This fact is conceded by Mr. Gupta, also. In this situation, the petitioner may make a representation against this seniority list. The representation, if any, made by the petitioner, shall be disposed of very expeditiously preferably within three months. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of." Consequent upon the aforesaid observations of this Court, the petitioner made a detailed representation on 29.1.1988 claiming her seniority w.e.f. 22.9.1976. The representation preferred by the petitioner has been disposed of vide the impugned order dated 27.10.1988 (Annexure P-7). Her representation has been rejected and she has been granted seniority as AG-I (M) from 5.9.1980 on the date when the petitioner is stated to have taken over as AG-I (M) in Punjab Region. It is this order (Annexure P-7) which is impugned in the present writ petition.
(3.) The main grievance of the petitioner is that she is entitled to seniority w.e.f. 22.9.1976 i.e. the date of her promotion and not from 5.9.1980 when she was given actual posting in Punjab Region. In this view of the matter, the petitioner places reliance upon Regulation 16(2)(a) of the 1971 Regulations, which inter alia, provides that the relative seniority of persons promoted to various grades will be determined in the order in which their names appear in the panel drawn up in accordance with Regulation 10. According to the petitioner, she was entitled to seniority with effect from 22.9.1976.;